The above-captioned case was originally scheduled for hearing on September 21, 2004 and a written decision, covering this facility, was issued on December 1, 2004.  The Applicant has returned to the Board requesting a reinstatement of the original variances granted to this facility and additional time to complete the project.  The most current hearing in this case was scheduled for hearing on August 21, 2007 at 1:00 P.M.  At that time, Chairman Coutu, Vice Chairman Newbrook and Commissioners Filippi, Walker, Jasparro, Richard, Jackson, Preiss, OConnell and Pearson were present.  Commissioner Blackburn recused himself from consideration of this case.  The fire service was represented by Assistant Deputy State Fire Marshal John Mackay of the Westerly Fire Marshals Office.  A motion was made by Vice Chairman Newbrook and seconded by Commissioner Pearson to grant the Applicant relief as outlined herein.  The motion was unanimous.

FINDINGS OF FACT
	The Board hereby incorporates its original findings of fact in file number 040102 as its initial findings of fact in this case.  In addition, the Board finds that the Applicant is in the process of bringing this entire facility into compliance with the exception of the prior variances.  Accordingly, the Applicant has requested a reinstatement of the prior variances in this case.  The Applicant has further requested additional time in which to bring the sprinkler and fire alarms into compliance.

CONCLUSIONS AND VARIANCE REQUESTS 

	1.  The Board hereby reinstates the prior variances found in file number 040102.
	2.  The Board hereby grants the Applicant a time variance of thirty (30) days from the date of this decision in which to complete the installation and upgrade of the sprinkler and fire alarm systems within this facility.  The Board hereby provides the Westerly Fire Marshal's office with the authority to extend the above deadline for good cause shown.  As a condition of this relief, the Board directs the Applicant to activate the sprinkler system throughout this facility while completing this project if possible.
 
STATUS OF DECISION AND APPEAL RIGHTS
	This Decision represents a comprehensive, integrated plan of fire safety for the above-captioned facility under the above-cited use or occupancy.  Accordingly, every variance granted is conditioned upon the Applicants timely and continued compliance with all of the directives of the Board. Every variance granted is further conditioned upon the continued use or occupancy of this facility under the above-cited classification reviewed by the Board.  (See: Board Rules and Regulations, section 6-2-17).
	Failure of the Applicant to initially comply with the full Decision of the Board, within the stated time frame, shall void all variances granted herein.  (See: Board Rules and Regulations, section 6-2-18.)  In the event of complete, timely and continued compliance with the full Decision of the Board, the above cited variances shall be deemed to have vested in the above-captioned facility.  As long as this facility is in continued compliance with the full Decision of the Board, the above-cited variances shall remain with this facility in the absence of any change in use or occupancy mandating review under a separate classification of the Fire Code or a revision of the above-cited classification.  (See: Board Rules and Regulations, section 6-2-19).  
Such changes in use or occupancy of this facility, or failure to continually comply with the Boards Decision shall void all variances granted under the above-cited use or occupancy.  If such change creates a new use or occupancy as outlined in R.I.G.L. 23-28.1-6, all variances granted under the original use or occupancy are void and this facility shall be reviewed under the newly created use or occupancy.  (See: Board Rules and Regulations, section 6-2-20).
	The Applicant may appeal the Boards Decision, within thirty (30) days of the mailing date of this Decision, by commencing an action against the State Fire Marshal in the Sixth division of the District Court.  Commencement of such an action does not operate as an automatic stay of this Decision [R.I.G.L. 42-35-15(c)].